The rocketing costs of gasoline and the escalating price of corn are the result of U.S. government mandates requiring the inclusion of ethanol in the gasoline all Americans must use. The time has long since passed to eliminate ethanol from this primary fuel.

A recent report by ActionAid USA, Fueling the Food Crisis: The Cost to Developing Countries of U.S. Corn Ethanol Expansion is based on work by researchers at Tufts University. ActionAid USA is an anti-poverty group. The study found that the corn-importing countries of Central America and North Africa are at the highest risk from ethanol expansionthe requirement to include ethanol with gasoline.

Strong policy should not be based on prayers for good weather, especially when the stakes are so high. From the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to the G20, it is time to recognize that current biofuel mandates are unsustainable, said Kristin Sundell, a policy analyst for ActionAid USA.

The group is calling on G20 leaders who are meeting on World Food Day, October 16, to eliminate incentives that encourage unsustainable biofuels production.

The idea behind ethanol is that it reduces carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and, in doing so, it saves the Earth from global warming/climate change, but CO2 plays no role in climate change, and shows up well after any increase or decrease of temperatures. Ethanol is bad science. It is bad for the engines of cars that must use such a gasoline blend. It increases the cost of gasoline and all other corn-based products. It actually increases the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. And it reduces the mileage a car can achieve with pure gasoline.

An authority on the U.S. oil industry is Sel Graham, the author of Why Your Gasoline Prices Are High. He is a man with more than fifty years experience, first as a petroleum reservoir engineer and later as an oil and gas attorney. He is also a graduate of West Point.

Heres what Graham has to say about the current gas prices: Gasoline prices could be decreased instantly by President Obama if he wanted to do so. Republicans have not yet picked up on this issue.

Abolishing the ethanol mandate requiring ethanol to be blended with gasoline at the pump or waiving the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) would: (1) lower gasoline prices by millions of dollars; (2) result in billions of miles of free travel annually; (3) prevent millions of tons of additional carbon dioxide from being emitted into the air; and (4) improve national security and the energy picture since it is impossible for US ethanol to ever replace foreign oil imports.

The following is reference data for skeptics. Gasoline prices can be lowered instantly by either abolishing the ethanol mandate which requires that ethanol be blended with gasoline at the pump or waiving the RFS. This would eliminate the millions of dollars in waivers which refineries are required to purchase because there is no cellulosic ethanol production, thereby decreasing the price of gasoline."

"The 2012 RFS for cellulosic ethanol is 8.65 million gallons. Cellulosic ethanol production through August 2012 has been only 20,069 gallons, a shortage of 8.63 million gallons requiring $0.78 per gallon waivers.

An essential truth that few Americans are aware of is that The price of U.S. oil is always lower than the price of foreign oil. Last year, U.S. oil averaged $95.73 per barrel, $7.25 cheaper than foreign oil imports at $102.98 per barrel. If U.S. oil replaced the 3,261 million barrels of foreign oil imports, it would be a savings to Americans of $23.6 billion annually.

Given the enormous oil reserves in America, both domestic and offshore, there is no reason why they should not be extracted, but the environmental movement in combination with the Environmental Protection Agency, the Interior and Energy Departments, has restricted access to our own oil.

The ethanol mandates are not just robbing Americans at the gas pump, they are endangering the cost of food prices worldwide

Besides the preposterous implications of turning a good portion of the food supply, and the implications of production, pricing and availability thereof, if I could get my hands on the bastard or bastards that got this ridiculous policy implemented, I’d whop’em upside the head with a twobyfour.

I’ve had three cars/trucks affected by this. Oxygen sensors! Get alarms all the time. Ethanol is death to a wide band O2 sensor. It eats gaskets, fuel lines, seals, you name it. I finally had to buy an OBII CAN tool to reset the damned engine “service required” light.

So, it looks like their plan is working. Their plan to get everyone out of their vehicles and into either public transportation or a bicycle.

And unabated, they won’t stop until they get their way, whether it takes decades of frustration over expensive auto repairs, waiting in long gas lines, too high gas prices, food shortages and skyrocketing food costs, whatever...it’s all about control with these leftist idiots.

My only question is....why the hell are we letting them get away with it?

11
posted on 10/15/2012 9:48:12 AM PDT
by XenaLee
(The only good commie is a dead commie.)

As my 2003 Nissan Altima approached 190,000 miles, I switched to 90 octane ethanol free gasoline. My mileage improved by 15 to 20%. The car ran better. I have since bought a new car, and I will continue to fill it up with non-ethanol fuel. It’s about 25% more, but I like the feeling of giving government the finger. Did I mention buying up a stockpile of incandescent light bulbs, enough to outlast the present administration?

Besides the preposterous implications of turning a good portion of the food supply, and the implications of production, pricing and availability thereof, if I could get my hands on the bastard or bastards that got this ridiculous policy implemented, Id whopem upside the head with a twobyfour.

if you want to choke someone, look no further than Bob Dole, the senator from Archer Daniels Midland (ADM). I think he is still alive. if so, you can find him drooling into his gruel at the Watergate Apartments in DC.

Better whop me with the 2X4, Because I support renewable fuel and the production of it here in the USA. There is a lot of crap to dislodge in the article and opinions above, but I'll try to give it a shot:

1. Ethanol actually is lowering the cost of gasoline right now even with the wrong headed blenders credit. Ethanol is cheaper to produce than the same amount of gasoline, by BTU, is being sold for by a wide margin right now. 2. I support renewable fuel not because I believe in any theoretical warming crisis or climate alarmism, but because I don't think it is wise to burn up the world's oil reserves that are being quickly depleted in a matter of a few generations, and do not seem to replenish themselves. Will our great grand children be happy we burned up the world's resources when their were already renewable alternatives, just because we were resistant to change? 3. I'd rather see jobs created producing fuel in this country than pay to buy it (directly or indirectly) from people who want to kill Americans and destroy our way of life. 4. The price of Corn going up is a great help to our farmers (it is a pass along cost for ranchers)since Manufacturing has been squeezed here in the USA, grain and meat exports are an ever increasing share of our foreign trade. As the world price rises for food our exports become more valuable as manufactured goods are becoming cheaper. Would you want it the other way? furthermore the law of supply and demand dictates that as the price of food goes up, third world farming operations that were once economically infeasible can now support their farmers leading to a greater overall supply of food and limiting the rise in food prices while increasing supply. We're crazy to be complaining about corn being used for fuel while our government is still paying farmers to grow weeds. (native grasses)

Furthermore I can't believe when Sel Graham, an oil and gas attorney is quoted in the article saying Abolishing the ethanol mandate... would: (1) lower gasoline prices by millions of dollars; (2) result in billions of miles of free travel annually; (3) prevent millions of tons of additional carbon dioxide from being emitted into the air; and (4) improve national security and the energy picture since it is impossible for US ethanol to ever replace foreign oil imports. that smart people here on FR believe those kind of lies.

With regard to your anecdotal evidence regarding your O2 sensor and "service required" light, I'll just counter with my own experience that after having my "service engine soon" light come on as a result of the O2 sensor in my 96 Chevy Impala SS, I fixed it by adding about 35% E-85 to my gas and this highly oxygenated fuel then burned the sensor clean and the light went out and the engine came back out of reversion mode for fuel metering. So while you claim ethanol ruins your stuff, it fixed mine, and often running a higher blend of ethanol than the prescribed 10%(which all cars are now built to take) resulted in my engine outlasting the transmission and the rest of the car.

FYI: Ethanol ups the octane of gasoline by quite a bit, so blenders now blend crappy cheaper and lower octane gasoline with the ethanol to achieve the same octane ratings that once required better gasoline. It pains me to see fellow republicans being turned against ethanol with the kind of poppycock arguments spelled out above and usually only effective on Democrats.

I forgot to add that: while I don’t believe “corn” ethanol is the ideal solution, or that we should refuse to import Brazilian “sugar cane” ethanol, ethanol as a whole is a step towards sustainable practices and we’ll eventually figure out which crops are the most optimal if market forces are allowed to prevail within the Government’s policy of breaking the current shortsighted petroleum based fuel monopoly.

most everything gets subsidized these days through no fault of its own, but politicians buying votes with your money. FWIW: the Blenders subsidy winds up in petroleum industry hands not in the hands of farmers or distillers. Ethanol production is not being subsidized, the Petroleum industry is being paid off to participate in what is leading to the reduction of their transportation fuel monopoly.

There is a difference between subsidizing an alternate fuel to push fuel use one way than say subsidizing petroleum for other reasons. For petroleum, the largest subsidy is $1B for the Strategic Oil Reserve, the second is $1 billion in tax exemptions for farm fuel. The third is $570 million for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program. Mainly political vs. push-use.

Agriculture, milk, et al are politcal also, but are subsidies, not the same kind though as for ethanol. For universities and Big Bird...that's a stretch.

Whether the ethanol subsidies go to the blenders or not, I find it difficult to believe that a farmer would sell his crop to the petroleum industry vs. food industry if there wasn't something tangible in it for him. Diversion of food resources away from the main supply drives prices up especially in drought conditions like now.

As for your anecdotal case of ‘fixing’ your own problem, good for you. However, the case against ethanol use in vehicles because of damage and problems isn't merely anecdotal - there are too many cases. Google wideband 02 sensor problems with ethanol, try looking for gas-ethanol problems related to 2 cycle and even 4 cycle engines. There are too many problems just to chalk this up to those evil petroleum spiking their real gas portion with bad gas. I've got more than one 2-cycle carb I've had to replace because the gaskets and diaphragms were ‘melted’.....

I'm not opposed to alternate fuels; I am opposed to the government ramming it down our throats when the auto industry clearly wasn't prepared for it by designing their fuel systems (gaskets and seals that don't dissolve) to keep from corroding and being damaged by ethanol.

BTW, in your case of ‘fixing’ it, there are models of vehicles now that will reset themselves after three successive ‘good starts’...i.e., running three times with no apparent O2 problem which is usually brought on by ethanol and a long fast coast down a level stretch or hill causing back pressure from the cat to the sensor.

. I support renewable fuel not because I believe in any theoretical warming crisis or climate alarmism, but because I don't think it is wise to burn up the world's oil reserves that are being quickly depleted in a matter of a few generations,

What poppycock. Your post reaks of someone from the utterly corrupt ethanol lobby.

The US had 1200 years of readily accessible clean coal. We have hundreds of years of natural gas and oil reserves.

There is no "depletion" in the foreseeable future. The reality is that without massive subsidies, wind and solar would be niche markets. Without subsidies ethanol would NEVER have become the evil scam that it has become.

Every year, massive "new" finds of energy sources of found. The peak oil freaks and other fatalist think the end of fossil fuels is a few generations away. What utter ignorance for anyone to believe such.

In hundreds of years, when fossil fuels are still readily available, there likely will have some discovery that will make energy even less costly. Let free people decide in the marketplace.

Nuclear is the potential to provide vast amounts of energy for all the worlds needs.

The only crisis in energy is politicians around the world interfering in the marketplace.

BTW, I know two auto repair shop owners. They state without a doubt that ethanol is destructive to older cars, and to small engines.

“The idea behind ethanol is that it reduces carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and, in doing so, it saves the Earth from global warming/climate change, but CO2 plays no role in climate change, and shows up well after any increase or decrease of temperatures. Ethanol is bad science. It is bad for the engines of cars that must use such a gasoline blend. It increases the cost of gasoline and all other corn-based products. It actually increases the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. And it reduces the mileage a car can achieve with pure gasoline. “
///
wow. ...so much insanity, in one thing.
and we pay for it in subsidies,
that we borrow money for.
which our children will have to repay,
with interest.
...beyond insane.

32
posted on 10/17/2012 5:03:50 AM PDT
by Elendur
(It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. - Thomas Jefferson)

I find it difficult to believe that a farmer would sell his crop to the petroleum industry vs. food industry if there wasn't something tangible in it for him.

They actually sell their grain to ethanol distillers, who compete with the petroleum industry. Farmers have to make ends meet. If you've got a truck with ten tons of grain to sell and the distillery offers you three cents more per bushel than the mill, you go there and get as much money for your grain as you can. Farmers are not in business just to take one for the team. Sorry, Old MacDonald is a capitalist. Plus you can then buy a truck load of used distillers grain to feed your livestock instead of driving back in an empty truck. If the distillery will take high moisture grain, while the mill will dock you a percentage, or not buy it at all, you sell your high moisture grain to the distillery. Ethanol has provided more competition for farmer's grain, helping farmers by providing more options. In short farmers sell to distillers because they compete for the farmer's business and win it. Furthermore if the farmers sold their grain to the mill for three cents less per bushel the mill would then sell the grain to the distillers and pocket the difference. Often times the distillery is built on the same railroad track as the mill for just that reason.

Your post reaks of someone from the utterly corrupt ethanol lobby. Bwa Haa Ha Ha! I get paid the big bucks to post my opinions while fools like you post for nothing! /S.

There is no "depletion" in the foreseeable future. Your post reaks of someone from the utterly corrupt petroleum lobby.

Nuclear is the potential to provide vast amounts of energy for all the worlds needs. So why are you pushing petrol VS ethanol when you really know the answer to this all is nukleeyer? Crazy!

BTW, I know two auto repair shop owners. They state without a doubt that ethanol is... And you believed them! Now that there is funny. I run a lot of ethanol in my vehicles and I don't know any repair shop owners. If my vehicles do ever need work, I do it myself.

Actually, I don’t care what farmers are in business for. Distillers ‘competing’ with mills is a government induced fluke for which taxpayers foot the bill. It isn’t free market.

The government in its misdirected energy policy coupled with political influence buying is paying distillers a subsidy with our money that allows them to pay more than mill prices which eventually drives up the going price per bushel OR reduces the available millable supply - rising prices.

It is wrong, just like it is wrong to subsidize dairy or petroleum or any other product. As long as there are subsidies, the ethanol industry will never stand on its own merit.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.